AMD Athlon X2 7850 vs. Intel Pentium E5300: Choosing the Best $70 CPU
by Anand Lal Shimpi on April 28, 2009 11:00 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
$74 Gets You Faster than any Pentium 4 Ever Made
The Pentium E5300 is very similar in clock speed and cache size to some of the original Core 2 Duos that launched in the summer of 2006. You may recall that Intel offered both 2MB and 4MB L2 variants of the Core 2 at launch. The E6300 and E6400 both had a 2MB L2, while the E6600, E6700 and X6800 all had a 4MB L2.
The Pentium E5300 is based on the Wolfdale core, which is faster than the original Conroe based Core 2s - but it only has a 2MB L2 like the old E6400. The E6400 however ran at 2.16GHz, the E5300 runs at 2.60GHz. In other words, today’s $74 Pentium E5300 is faster than the original Core 2 Duo E6400.
But the comparison gets even more interesting. Remember that the E6400, at launch, was faster than even the fastest Pentium 4 - the dual core, four thread Pentium Extreme Edition 965 running at 3.73GHz. The charts below from my original Core 2 Duo review show just that:
Do you see where I’m going with this? While the data above is old, it shows that the E6400 was faster than the fastest Pentium 4 ever released. And the $74 E5300 is faster than the E6400, therefore the Pentium E5300 is faster than any Pentium 4 ever released.
Most people didn’t have 3.73GHz Pentium Extreme Editions in their systems - they had lower clocked versions, in which case the E5300 should be even faster. If you had a 2.8GHz Pentium D, I’d expect the Pentium E5300 to be anywhere between 20 - 40% faster regardless of application. Mmm Moore’s Law.
The Test
Motherboard: | Intel DX48BT2 (Intel X48) MSI DKA790GX Platinum (AMD 790GX) |
Chipset: | Intel X48 AMD 790GX |
Chipset Drivers: | Intel 9.1.1.1010 (Intel) AMD Catalyst 8.12 |
Hard Disk: | Intel X25-M SSD (80GB) |
Memory: | G.Skill DDR2-800 2 x 2GB (4-4-4-12) G.Skill DDR2-1066 2 x 2GB (5-5-5-15) Qimonda DDR3-1066 4 x 1GB (7-7-7-20) |
Video Card: | eVGA GeForce GTX 280 |
Video Drivers: | NVIDIA ForceWare 180.43 (Vista64) NVIDIA ForceWare 178.24 (Vista32) |
Desktop Resolution: | 1920 x 1200 |
OS: | Windows Vista Ultimate 32-bit (for SYSMark) Windows Vista Ultimate 64-bit |
55 Comments
View All Comments
just4U - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 - link
Can't see the 5300 outdoing the 5200 really. At best it might equal it or not be as good. I Don't even see why anyone would buy the 5300 for overclocking at all.. (unless ofcourse the 5200 is at the end of it's line)as a guesstimate...
5300 might get anywhere from 3.8-4.0+
4850 would get anywhere from 3.1-3.3+
End of overclock guestimate review (grin)
(on article topic.. Great review. Mixed bag of results really and once you factor in budget chipset boards it clouds the choice even further)
memphist0 - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 - link
Definately would like to see some overclocking with a mid range coolerErif - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 - link
Yes, I'd like to see how the 7850 OCes compared to my 7750.johnsonx - Wednesday, April 29, 2009 - link
There's unlikely to be any different at all between a 7850 and 7750; any differences would be the normal chip to chip variability in overclocking. It's not a comparison even worth doing.Doc01 - Tuesday, July 27, 2010 - link
Athlon has surpassed all expectations!<a href="http://www.salesgeneric.net">http://www.sa...